Workshop Report Strengthening Landscape Governance Capacities in Bhutan

Transcription

1 Workshop Report 2017 Strengthening Landscape Governance Capacities in Bhutan 1

2 About ICIMOD The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) is a regional knowledge development and learning centre serving the eight regional member countries of the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan based in Kathmandu, Nepal. Globalization and climate change have an increasing influence on the stability of fragile mountain ecosystems and the livelihoods of mountain people. ICIMOD aims to assist mountain people to understand these changes, adapt to them, and make the most of new opportunities, while addressing upstream and downstream issues. ICIMOD supports regional transboundary programmes through partnerships with regional partner institutions, facilitates the exchange of experiences, and serves as a regional knowledge hub. We strengthen networking among regional and global centres of excellence. Overall, we are working to develop economically and environmentally-sound mountain ecosystems to improve the living standards of mountain populations and to sustain vital ecosystem services for the billions of people living downstream now and in the future. ICIMOD gratefully acknowledges the support of its core donors: The governments of Afghanistan, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. 2

3 Workshop Report Strengthening Landscape Governance Capacities in Bhutan UWICE-Bumthang, Bhutan, March, 2017 International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, June 2017 i

4 Published by International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development GPO Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal Copyright 2017 International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development All rights reserved. Published 2017 Prepared by: Cora van Oosten, Tashi Dorji, Brij Rathore, Nawraj Pradhan, and Tenzin Choigey Production team Rachana Chettri (Editor) Christopher Butler (Editor) Punam Pradhan (Graphic designer) Asha Kaji Thaku (Editorial assistant) Photos: Alex Treadway, Cora Van Oosten, Nawraj Pradhan, Tenzin Choigey Note This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. ICIMOD would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from ICIMOD. The views and interpretations in this publication are those of the author(s). They are not attributable to ICIMOD and do not imply the expression of any opinion concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or the endorsement of any product. This publication is available in electronic form at Citation: ICIMOD (2017) Strengthening landscape governance capacities in Bhutan. Workshop Report. Kathmandu: ICIMOD ii

5 Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations 1. Introduction 1 2. What is Landscape Governance? 2 3. Why Landscape Governance in Bhutan, and Why Now? 3 4. Bhutanese Landscapes 4 5. The National Policy Framework of Gross National Happiness 5 6. Building a Landscape Governance Framework for Bhutan 6 7. Applying Landscape Governance in Bumthang Capacity to think and act from a landscape perspective Capacity to achieve coherence in landscape diversity Capacity to make institutions work for the landscape Capacity to create landscape market value Capacity to manage landscape resources sustainably Assessing the Landscape s Governance Capacity; Assessing 13 our Landscape Governance Capacities 9. Adapting the Framework to the Bhutanese Context Moving Ahead 18 References 19 Annex: Core Capacities and Key Dimensions of Landscape governance 20 v iii

6 iv

7 Acronyms and Abbreviations ADB CDI DoL GNH GNHC HIMALICA HKH HOAREC&N ICIMOD PES REDD+ TOT UWICE WCD Asian Development Bank Centre for Development Innovation Department of Livestock Gross National Happiness Gross National Happiness Commission Rural Livelihoods and Climate Change Adaptation in the Himalaya Initiative Hindu Kush Himalaya Horn of Africa Regional Centre & Network International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development Payment for Ecosystem Services Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation Initiative Training of Trainers Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation and Environment Wildlife Conservation Division v

8 vi

9 1. Introduction The Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH) represent one of the world s most diverse ecoregions, with ecosystems ranging from tropical humid forests to arid, alpine grasslands. Each of these ecosystems has its own rich biodiversity and provides services crucial to the lives and livelihoods of more than 200 million people living in the region and almost 1.3 billon people living in river basins downstream. Following the ecosystem approach set out by the Convention on Biological Diversity, the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) has been working with its regional member countries to identify and develop transboundary landscape initiatives in the HKH with the goal of improving those ecosystem functions and services that are crucial for human wellbeing. ICIMOD and Wageningen University have collaborated to develop landscape approaches and landscape governance capacities in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. These efforts are intended to enable ICIMOD partners to acquire the appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to facilitate landscape governance mechanisms in such a way that they contribute to the sustainable management of ecosystem goods and services to improve the livelihoods of the landscapes inhabitants, while enhancing ecological integrity, economic development, and socio-cultural resilience in an integrated manner. Following the above, ICIMOD and the Centre for Development Innovation (CDI) conducted the first workshop on Landscape Governance Planning and Preparation in July 2016, especially for ICIMOD staff and implementing partners, with the aim of understanding the concept of landscape governance, and identifying core capacities that professionals need to facilitate landscape governance on the ground. We did this by using the 5C capacity development framework developed by CDI, which in turn is based on the capability approach of Amartya Sen (1999), the Five Capabilities Framework of Baser and Morgan (2008), the core components of the sustainable livelihood approach (Bebbington, 1999), and the Ten Principles of an Adaptive Landscape Approach (Sayer et al, 2013). A follow-up workshop on Regional Training of Trainers (TOT) on Transboundary Landscape Governance was held in Chitwan, Nepal, from 25 September to 5 October The workshop was organized to modify and validate the framework developed so far, as well as to train practitioners from different countries and organizations in the major concepts of landscape governance. During the workshop, a draft curriculum was designed, including five modules (see Annex). In this workshop, Bhutan was represented by senior officials from the Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation and Environment (UWICE), the Gross National Happiness Commission (GNHC), the Wildlife Conservation Division (WCD) and the Department of Livestock (DoL). The Bhutanese team contributed actively, and suggested that follow up training be done in Bhutan. 1

10 2. What is Landscape Governance? Integrated landscape approaches originated from the need to address multiple objectives simultaneously. They aim to build bridges between institutional silos and to integrate different policy fields in order to achieve coherent spatial planning mechanisms relevant to a given context. At the heart of landscape approaches is landscape governance. Focusing on landscape governance reveals the potential of landscape approaches in general, since landscape governance is more specific concerning the underpinning of processes of multi-sector, multi-actor and multi-level interactions and spatial decision making at the landscape level. This relates to the generally accepted Ten Principles of an Adaptive Landscape Approach (Sayer et al, 2013), which reflect the participatory nature of landscape governance. However, in practice it remains challenging to operate on the basis of these principles due to the complexity of building stakeholder coalitions and networks beyond administrative and jurisdictional boundaries, as well as mitigating resource-related conflicts on the ground (Sayer et al, 2016). Landscape actors are usually assumed to be capable of facilitating such complex processes. Most often they are not, and this raises several questions concerning governance capacity: How is it to be assessed, how can it inform landscape actors, and how can it inform initiatives supporting the enhancement of such capacity? What would be needed for sustainable and multi-actor-supported landscape governance? What creates the basis for long-term collaboration between stakeholders (governments, companies, and civil society) sharing the same landscape, with the ultimate aim of reconciling conservation and socio-economic trade-offs at the landscape level? 2

11 3. Why Landscape Governance in Bhutan, and Why Now? The Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation and Environment (UWICE) ( is a premier institute in Bhutan with a triple goal: 1. Contribute to science and knowledge by conducting research and policy analyses in relevant problem areas, 2. Mainstream scientific research findings into environmental policy and decision-making processes, and 3. Train current and future generation of conservation and environmental leaders, practitioners and academics. UWICE is currently in the process of developing a two year certificate course set to begin in July The inclusion of a Landscape Governance course can add value and a new dimension to the already existing rich content of the planned course. Moreover, Bhutan is currently working on the preparation of its 12th Five Year Plan. The plan sets out new elements of greater inclusivity in development planning by engaging all stakeholders and building a national consensus on the plan to ensure that every stakeholder can identify with and see the plan as being a National Development Plan and not a Government Plan (GNHC, 2017). Coordination, consolidation and collaboration have been identified as fundamental principles underpinning all the goals, strategies, and programmes of the plan. They cut across all sectors and development actors in the country government, corporations, private sector, civil society organizations. Introducing the concept of landscape governance can be helpful to designing a sustainable and inclusive five year development plan as it offers a good framework for integrated policy making at different levels (from local to national) and across sectors with reference to the Sustainable Development Goals, and a strong linkage to the national framework of Gross National Happiness. 3

12 4. Bhutanese Landscapes Bhutan is a mountainous country with 72% of its area still under forest cover, and with a sparse population. Its people have always lived in harmony with nature, with the forest groves, the high mountains, rocks, springs, lakes, and rivers giving meaning to its people and their daily lives. People are sincerely devoted to maintaining their environment to avoid the wrath of the deities and to ensuring the protection of individuals and communities. People seek to live in harmony with nature, and the spirits residing in them. Sacred groves and trees like the giant cypress tree near the Kurje Monastery in Bumthang, which is actually considered to be the walking stick of Guru Rinpoche, are carefully protected (Ngeema Sangay Tshenpo, 2012). There are numerous products from nature which are used in Bhutanese daily life, such as juniper leaves which are burnt and used in religious ceremonies, or Ophiocordyceps sinensis, which is used for a variety of medical purposes. And nature as a whole forms the context for prayers and meditation, and spiritual well-being. Article 5 of the 2008 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan states that every Bhutanese is a trustee of the Kingdom s natural resources and environment for the benefit of the present and future generations. It is the duty of every citizen to contribute to the protection of the natural environment, conservation of its biodiversity, and prevention of all forms of environmental degradation. Further, article 5.3 stipulates that a minimum of 60% of Bhutan s total land should be maintained under forest cover for all time (ibid). In Bhutan, several communities are settled in the vicinity or even within protected areas and biological corridors. Long term conservation policies, although important for the nation as a whole, may not be directly in the interest of these rural people who are constantly in search for food, clothing, shelter, education, and markets for their products. This is the reason why Bhutan has given more attention to the social and economic aspects of natural resources, to better take into account the needs of its citizens (ibid). This offers an excellent basis for Bhutan s holistic approach to environmental conservation encompassing the protection of biodiversity, the maintenance of its biocultural values, and the well-being of its people. In this sense, landscape approaches and landscape governance are already practiced in Bhutan, although not named as such. Looking at Bhutan s Wheel of Happiness, we see the balance between human wellbeing and the wellbeing of nature well represented, and we see the protection of the country s rich biocultural diversity at the heart of its development policy. This tallies very well with concepts of sense of place and sense of belonging which are frequently used in landscape approaches, and which equally reflect the unbreakable bond between people and their landscapes. Nevertheless, it is also in Bhutan that maintaining a harmonious bond between people and nature is increasingly being challenged. Human-wildlife conflict, overgrazing, land degradation, and waste have become growing problems. More awareness of the need to be environmentally conscious, and appropriate policies to support this awareness, are therefore needed. It is in this regard that the further development of an integrated landscape approach for Bhutan may help. 4

13 5. The National Policy Framework of Gross National Happiness As far back as the eighteenth-century, the legal code of 1729 in Bhutan stated: The purpose of the government is to provide happiness to its people. If it cannot provide happiness, there is no reason for the government to exist. In 1972, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck introduced the concept of Gross National Happiness (GNH) as a formal instrument for balanced and holistic development, stating that gross domestic product alone cannot deliver happiness and well-being. Article 9 of the Constitution of Bhutan 2008 demands that the State should strive to promote those conditions that will enable the pursuit of Gross National Happiness. According to the GNH framework, a person is to be bonded deeply to his or her safe and supportive community, while a community is set deeply in its nurturing ecology (ADB, 2017). Environmental diversity, community vitality, (bio) cultural diversity, and time use are therefore strongly interrelated, and cannot be seen in isolation. True happiness comes from living in selfless harmony with nature rather than exploiting nature. It is therefore important to recognize the place of human beings in their wider environment, and acknowledge human responsibility for nature from the understanding that our human attitudes have a significant effect upon our minds, as well as on our environment. Human beings have the power, ability and freedom to make fundamental changes in the environment, for better or for worse. With such values we can safeguard our landscapes from becoming over-exploited, as we have realized that we are part of the landscape itself (Ngeema Sangay Tshenpo, 2012). This is essentially close to what landscape professionals call think landscape. It is clear that by adopting the GNH framework, both State and society will do things differently, as they need to create new norms of decision making requiring new institutions. This requires a re-definition of the relation between tradition and modernity, and between the environment and economic growth (ADB, 2017). Although the GNH index has no physical measures of ecological wealth such as biodiversity and local natural resources, it uses people s perceptions of their own state of happiness. Translated into landscape terminology, this means that for a landscape s inhabitants to be happy, one should not only take into account the economic benefits, but also the spiritual, aesthetic and recreational values that a landscape provides. These can be measured by the GNH index through its elaborate set of indicators covering the nine domains of GNH. The Gross National Happiness Commission (GNHC) is the coordinating agency which assures the incorporation of GNH indicators in all policies and five-year development plans. This way, the GNHC can be considered an integrative body for policy integration, which checks the alignment of GNH indicators and intervenes when sectoral policies may not fit well with GNH indicators. Figure 1: The four pillars of GNH Figure 2: The nine domains of GNH Psychological wellbeing Promotion of good governance Equitable socio-economic development Living standards Ecological diversity and resilience Health Time use Preservation and promotion of culture Conservation of the environment Community vitality Education Good governance Cultural diversity and resilience 5

14 6. Building a Landscape Governance Framework for Bhutan As the basis for our work, we used the framework developed by CDI and ICIMOD during the previous workshops. In this original framework, five capacities are identified, which are: 1. The capacity to think landscape; 2. The capacity to achieve coherence in diversity; 3. The capacity to make institutions work for landscapes; 4. The capacity to create market value; 5. The capacity to manage resources sustainably and inclusively. Based on these five capacities, we assessed the participants individual strengths and weaknesses to identify the most relevant fields for the development of their capacities. Participants scored themselves relatively high on their ability to think landscape, as they are very aware of the tangible and intangible values of their landscapes. They also scored high on their ability to manage a landscape s resources, which is not surprising, as most participants were professional natural resource management (NRM) managers. The accumulated scoring of the participants abilities are represented in Section 8. More detailed information on the framework can be found at forestlandscaperestoration.org/tool/landscape-governance-capacity-framework. Figure 3: The original landscape governance framework External Think and act integrated landscape External Manage landscape resources sustainably Internal Landscape Past, present, future Achieve coherene in landscape diversity Internal Create landscape market value Internal Make institutions work for the landscape External 6

15 7. Applying Landscape Governance in Bumthang The workshop in Bumthang was based on the principles of experiential learning, which implies that it has a strong participatory character, and all the theoretical learning needs to have a practical and experiential basis. This is why the workshop started with a field trip, during which participants got to know the Bumthang landscape, its strengths, and its relative weaknesses, or areas where interventions could be planned. During the field trip, participants learned from the stakeholders they met, and from the landscape and its natural and spiritual elements. After their return, the participants used their field trip experiences to develop their capacities in the five components of the framework, reflecting the five areas of landscape governance. 7.1 Capacity to think and act from a landscape perspective In order to be able to teach, facilitate or providing training on landscape governance, one has to be knowledgeable about general landscape dynamics. One has to be familiar with the main landscape vocabulary, the biophysical characteristics of a landscape, the socio-cultural identities of the landscape, the major issues at stake, and the interests of the main stakeholders involved. One has to be familiar with the past, present, and potential future of a landscape to be able to design potential pathways to change. 7

16 In order to be able to think landscape, one has to be able to not only physically, but also mentally and emotionally connect to the landscape. One has to be able to feel and become part of it. In order to do so, participants had daily meditation sessions, during which they connected with themselves, with each other, and with the wider environment. These meditations helped them to attain a higher level of thinking, feeling, and being the landscape. From the tools provided in the toolkit, they practiced landscape mapping (rich picturing) and built a landscape story in a systematic way. In this way, the participants tried to get a deeper understanding of the processes and dynamics of the landscape, and identify the major issues or problems at stake. These issues or problems formed the ingredients for a more systematic analysis during the workshop. 7.2 Capacity to achieve coherence in landscape diversity This module is an important yet difficult one as it has to do with the capacity to reconcile and align interests and appreciations, leading to a common concern or a common vision amongst stakeholders, which could form the basis for broadly shared landscape ambitions. Major questions to be asked in this regard are: How do we initiate and facilitate a landscape dialogue? How do we want such dialogue to take shape? How shall we bring in governments, businesses, civil society and science to tackle the challenges of modern development which are changing our landscapes? What do we want to preserve? What do we need to change? How do we bring about this desired change? Different actors within the landscape may be concerned with the same issues, but may look at it from a different perspective, driven by different interests. Bringing about change therefore depends on alignment, 8

17 across different actors and sectors in the landscape. In order to do so, we need to foster relations across these groups, and help them collaborate. We can only do this is if we manage to develop shared perspectives, new understanding, and collective commitment for landscape wide action, even between groups who may at first seem to have diverging interests or be in conflict. In order to learn how to do this, participants used some of the tools provided in the toolkit, such as the identification of stakeholders and the identification of the way in which they are affecting or are affected by an identified issue. After that, they identified the stakes, roles and responsibilities of each of the stakeholders involved, their level of interest, their level of influence, and the power relations between them. The participants also identified existing stakeholder networks, and designed strategies to strengthen stakeholders, empower those who are weaker, and leverage power relations within the landscape. 7.3 Capacity to make institutions work for the landscape When we talk about social, environmental, economic, and political change, we are really talking about changing the underlying institutions, structures, or traditions. By institutions we mean the rules of the game, the formal and informal norms and values that shape how people think and behave within the context of their landscape. When we talk about landscape institutions, we mean the ecological and socio-cultural rules that shape the landscape. These can be deeply held values, established traditions, and formal policy frameworks. These can be formal and informal; these can be political, legal, social, cultural, religious, economic, or shaped by nature itself. In short, they are all the rules that regulate the cultural values, the use of resources, the livelihoods, the tenure regimes, either customary, or regulated by modern law. Figure 4: Landscape institutional framework Meaning Beliefs, norms and values Frameworks for understanding Organizations and networks Mandates, policies and strategies Formal and informal relationships Association Formal and informal rules Control Functions, products and services Regular practices and behaviours Production 9

18 Figure 5: Policies in Bumthang landscape Pastoralism Agricultural Policy Forest policy Informal agreement Land policy International agreement Customary rules Market rules Religious rules Recent decades have seen major changes in the institutional mandates, the rules and regulations governing landscapes. In many countries, clarifying rights and responsibilities have replaced the command-and-control approach from the past, and rules on resource access and land use have been negotiated and put in place. Still, the rights and responsibilities of different actors need to be clear to and accepted by all stakeholders. Clarification of conflicting claims will require changes, ideally negotiated, that may be legal or informal. When conflict arises, there needs to be an accepted legitimate system for arbitration, justice, and reconciliation (Sayer et al, 2013). To get grip on the phenomenon of institutions, the participants used the institutional framework developed by Woodhill et al (2007) as described in the toolkit. Identifying institutions of meaning, of association, of production, and of control helped them understand the different functions of institutions, and understand how a healthy landscape requires a right balance between all four functions. The participants realized that it is particularly hard to identify institutions of meaning, as the deeper cultural and spiritual meaning of our landscapes are often taken for granted, or they are so deeply embedded in our thinking, that we find it hard to recognize them. It is, however, of crucial importance to recognize them, name them, and understand their role, to avoid them being forgotten in the sometimes overwhelming speed of development. After having identified and discussed the functions of institutions, the participants switched to the importance of policies. The Bumthang landscape is not short of policies, there are actually more policies than can be realistically followed. Some of these policies are in contradiction, leading to policy incoherence within the landscape. This requires policy change, in the sense of better coordinating, harmonising, or even integrating policies, to make them better fit the landscape. The basic requirements of policy integration are true communication and dialogue between sectors, recognizing policy incoherencies, and working towards inter-sectoral dialogue at the landscape level. The ability to think out of the box, and be able to work in an inter-sectoral manner is what we call institutional entrepreneurship. Good landscape professionals therefore need to be entrepreneurial, and learn how to think out of their own sectoral box. The GNH framework helps in this process of creating policy coherence, as it assesses all policies, and holds them against GNH indicators, to assure alignment and avoid inconsistency with GNH domains and their indicators. 10

19 7.4 Capacity to create landscape market value Creating landscape market value implies that a landscape has to be able to fulfil the livelihood needs of its inhabitants. It has to harbour the production systems that secure sufficient and nutritious food for all. But there is more than securing a landscape s inhabitants needs for sufficient and nutritious food. There may also be the need to produce a surplus, which can be marketed, to generate a monetary income through either direct sale or employment opportunities for the inhabitants. As the global demand for food, fibre, and fuel is rapidly growing, there is a global search for disclosing new production areas where commodities can be sourced. The search for new sourcing areas has certainly led to new opportunities to create market value in our landscapes. But it has also increased competition and conflict over resources. Commodity companies are increasingly aware of the environmental and social problems that are created by their sourcing strategies, and they try to develop more sustainable and inclusive business models. This may however not be very relevant to the Bumthang landscape, as there are no big commodity enterprises, but there are a lot of small entrepreneurs, who are basing their business on the landscape s resources, its natural resources, its spiritual values, or its beautiful sceneries. Through their working together, they managed to create landscape market value in a way that does not exceed the carrying capacity of the landscape. 7.5 Capacity to manage landscape resources sustainably The capacity to manage a landscape s resources in an adaptive manner builds upon all the previous modules. Adaptive management and planning means that stakeholders develop their landscape plans based on a landscape s present situation, as well as future aspirations and ambitions. As time passes and situations change, landscape plans will need to be adjusted. Essentially, landscape management and planning are responsive rather than prescriptive. These days, landscape or spatial planning are no longer the mandate of governments alone. On the contrary, spatial planning has been one of the sectors pioneering with participatory and adaptive planning, in a most creative way. Spatial information and the use of spatial data in participatory spatial planning processes has developed rapidly. This is particularly relevant to landscape governance, which is not about the technicalities of resource management, but about the process of collecting and using information, the development of policy options, the negotiation, and the transparent decision-making. Transparency is most important throughout the process. Transparency is achieved through a mutually understood and negotiated process of change, based on accessible and understandable spatial information, and built upon 11

20 stakeholder engagement in all stages of the process. This requires a broad consensus on general visions, goals, challenges, and concerns, as well as on all options and opportunities at hand. All stakeholders need to understand and accept the general logic, legitimacy, and justification for a course of action, and to be aware of the risks and uncertainties. Building and maintaining such a consensus is a fundamental goal of landscape governance (Sayer et al, 2013). The participants did an exercise to test their capacity to manage adaptively and shared an experience of springshed management as an example of how a true landscape perspective may totally change usual management practice. In this case, it was from watershed management to springshed management. This requires the ability to understand the landscape s hydrology and manage its water resources accordingly. Figure 6: Adaptive management cycle Assess Adjust Plan Evaluate Implement Monitor Figure 7: Springshed management 12

21 8. Assessing the Landscape s Governance Capacity; Assessing our Landscape Governance Capacities Building upon all the exercises, the participants tried to identity the strengths and weaknesses of the visited landscapes, and identified the major areas of intervention needed. The strength of the Bumthang landscape lies in its ability to think landscape, and recognize its tangible and intangible values, as well as the ability to manage resources. Less strong however, are its capacities to achieve coherence, to make institutions work for the landscape, and to create market value. If we compare this outcome with the landscape governance capacities of the individual participants, we see that these are rather similar. This means that, if participants really want to help develop their landscapes, additional capacities are needed, especially in the three mentioned domains of achieving coherence, institutions, and creating landscape market value. Figure 8: Bumthang landscape s governance capacities Figure 8: The participants landscape capacities Evaluation of strengths and areas for learning Module 1: Think landscape Module 5: Managing resource Module 2: Building coherence Module 4: Markets Module 3: Institutions for landscape 13

22 9. Adapting the Framework to the Bhutanese Context The most important part of the workshop was to tailor the original framework to the Bhutanese context. This required quite some thinking, as the original framework does not put much emphasis on the cultural and spiritual values of the landscape. It is also not so sensitive to traditions and customs, and the intangible elements of the landscape such as the deities and the spiritual world, which are so notably present in the Bumthang landscape. In order to achieve coherence in diversity, the participants talked about the importance of community vitality, as well as the landscape s vitality. They reflected on the importance of landscape leadership, and realized that landscape leadership is not far from the Wheel of Happiness, which is built on the principle that happiness starts with the psychological and spiritual wellbeing of an individual. Only through this psychological and spiritual wellbeing people can live in harmony with nature, enhance quality of life, enhance quality of ecosystems, and conserve the wider environment at large. This Wheel of Happiness follows the same logic of the commonly used framework for landscape leadership. It is based on the ability of an individual to have a passion for the landscape, the ability to share this passion with others and make it a collective passion, the ability of the collective to draw in outside actors (migrants, visitors, policy makers, and investors) and make them aware of the (in)tangible values of the landscape, and to create and maintain harmony between people and their place. Figure 9: Wheel of happiness 14

23 Figure 10: General framework for landscape leadership It The larger environment place itself I The passion sense of place They We and the others connecting institutions claiming place We The collective building coherence making place Building on the Wheel of Happiness and taking into account the four pillars and nine domains of the national policy framework of Gross National Happiness, the participants considerably changed the framework, and made valuable adjustments and additions to its five modules. Each of the five modules were rephrased, and their content was adapted, in order to better fit the Bhutanese cultural and political context. In order to do so, they made use of the KETSO toolkit, which helped them visualize the new framework and its components ( 15

24 The changes which were made in the original framework were the following: Table 1: Proposed changes to improve the framework Module Title Changes to be incorporated 1 Think landscape More emphasis on harmony, spirituality and inner peace by incorporating local deities, sacred groves, the influence of the lunar calendar, and the psychological and spiritual wellbeing of all actors and elements in the landscape. It should also pay attention to reincarnation, and what this means for the harmony between the actors and elements of the landscape. Also incorporate the challenge of globalization, and how it will impact the landscape. Should we embrace modernity or resist? What does that mean for the landscape? Gross National Happiness is a good model for learning how to think landscape. Gross landscape happiness should be included as a core component, as measurable framework for a landscape s happiness. 2 Achieve coherence Incorporation of the challenges of bringing stakeholders together. More attention to conflict and conflict management. More attention for the coordination between stakeholders within landscapes, and the mechanisms that can be used for improved coordination. Also more attention for time expenditure. This could be related to the time spent on coordination and participation in multi-stakeholder dialogue. But it could also relate to the incorporation of landscape quality time, such as social gatherings, festivals, landscape stories and songs, sports, archery and other types of leisure which can be related to the landscape. More emphasis on the relations between landscapes, as most landscapes are interrelated to others. This is linked to the issue of transboundary landscapes, addressed to in Module 3. Leadership should be a clear component of it. 3 Make institutions work Incorporation of Gross National Happiness framework, incorporation of transboundary issues, as a landscape s happiness goes beyond its administrative and jurisdictional boundaries. More emphasis on local belief systems, values and symbols, and their value for the landscape. Incorporation of transparency, accountability, and participation, which are generally considered to be the indicators of good governance. 4 Create market value Incorporation of the valuation of a landscape s tangible and intangible resources, and creation of market mechanisms such as PES. There should be more attention to equitable benefit sharing and the issue of gender equality. Incorporation of the issue of patent rights and intellectual property rights, which are important to landscape business, its branding and its marketing. 5 Manage resources How to keep local management practices alive? How to document them and keep using them effectively? Inclusion of strategic environmental assessment and adaptive management in relation to climate change. How to make a landscape resilient to climate change? Inclusion of waste management, as this is the core challenge of managing landscape resources. There could also be more attention to specific management frameworks such as watershed and springshed management. 16

25 As a result of the exercise, we came up with a new landscape governance framework. It is a modified version of the original framework, which better suits the context of Bhutan. The content of each of the modules were examined and adjusted, and will have to be incorporated in the new landscape governance framework, according to the recommendations made in Table 1. Figure 11: The new landscape governance framework as adapted to the Bhutanese context Think landscape: appreciate both its tangible and intangible values Manage landscape resources (esp. water and springs) sustainably Achieve coherence: create vitality within and between communities Create vibrant landscape economies to sustain local livelihoods Keep traditions alive: blend them with policy frameworks and laws 17

26 10. Moving Ahead It was generally agreed that the workshop was useful. It was agreed that the workshop should not be seen as a stand-alone workshop but rather as the start of a process. This process has three components: 1. UWICE could start incorporating the topic of landscape governance into its curriculum. As UWICE is currently designing its new curriculum for a two-year certificate programme, it will be fairly easy to include it as one of the topics to be developed. The college of Natural Resources, Royal University of Bhutan, can also consider integrating some aspects of landscape governance in their degree and master s level curriculum. 2. Bhutan is currently preparing its 12th Five Year Plan. Some of the elements of landscape governance could be incorporated in the planning as they may be useful, especially in achieving the strategy of coordination, collaboration, and consolidation at the decentralized level. 3. The topic of landscape governance can be incorporated in the work of ICIMOD s transboundary landscape programme (Kanchenjunga landscape) and other initiatives (eg, Himalica and REDD ++) in which Bhutan is involved. Its facilitators can be trained in using the tools and the topic can be incorporated in the next phase of ICIMOD s transboundary landscape programme. The responsibility of taking it forward is a shared one. Much can be done by UWICE and its staff, as well as the current transboundary landscape teams. But additional assistance may be needed from both ICIMOD and CDI. Together, we should acquire the funding which is needed to take this forward. Collaborative action in relation to project development and joint action at the Global Landscape Forum for example could be important in this regard. The three documents the Landscape Governance Framework, the Toolkit, and the Twelve tips to design a competence based landscape curriculum that were written before the workshop will be adapted and finalized by Cora van Oosten (CDI). If necessary, with co-finance from the Horn of Africa Regional Centre & Network (HOAREC&N), which is interested in the development of similar material. 18

27 References Asian Development Bank (2017): Bhutan new pathways to growth. Edited by Sabyasachi Mitra and Hoe Yun Jeong, ADB/Oxford, UK Baser, H., P. Morgan (2008) Capacity, change and performance. Discussion Paper No 58. ECDPM, Maastricht Brouwer, H. et al (2015): The Multi-Stakeholder Partnership Guide. Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen, Netherlands Bebbington, A. (1999) Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Development 27(12): Ngeema Sangay Tshempo (2012): A glimpse of Bhutanese culture Oosten, C.J. van (2017): Building an integrated curriculum for strengthening landscape governance capacities. Part 1: assessing and enhancing landscape governance capacities building a framework. ICIMOD-Wageningen CDI (draft) Oosten, C.J. van (2017): Building an integrated curriculum for strengthening landscape governance capacities. Part 2: Toolkit. ICIMOD-Wageningen CDI (draft) Oosten, C.J. van (2017): Building an integrated curriculum for strengthening landscape governance capacities. Part 3: Twelve tips for the design and delivery of a competence based landscape governance curriculum. ICIMOD- Wageningen CDI (draft) Sayer, J. et al. (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. PNAS 110(21) Sayer, J. et al. (2016) Measuring the effectiveness of landscape approaches to conservation and development. Sustain Science, Springer, DOI /s z Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press, Oxford Woodhill, J. (2008): Shaping behaviour how institutions evolve. Article published in The Broker Online, October 07,

28 Annex Core capacities and key dimensions of landscape governance (derived from the original framework, before adapting it to the specific context of Bhutan) 1. Capability to think and act from an integrated landscape perspective (towards institutionalized landscape thinking) Key dimensions 1.1 Landscape awareness: the ability to think landscape, and develop a sense of place 1.2 Landscape assessment: the ability to understand landscape assets and conditions 1.3 Landscape information and communication: the ability to access and exchange landscape-related information 1.4 Recognizing landscape opportunities and threats: the ability to take a position in view of landscape interests 1.5 Anticipating landscape futures/responsiveness: the ability to envision the future of the landscape in view of different scenarios, involving the anticipation of relevant conditions and dynamics beyond the landscape 2. Capability to achieve coherence in landscape diversity (towards inclusiveness and togetherness in the landscape) Key dimensions 1.1 Landscape leadership: the ability to reconcile and align interests and appreciations, leading to an enhanced sense of responsibility and shared landscape ambitions 1.2 Facilitating multi-stakeholder networking: the ability to create networks and foster partnerships among landscape actors. 1.3 Establishing common concern/pathways: the ability to find common ground as landscape partners 1.4 Leveraging power relationships: the ability to mitigate power differentials in the landscape 1.5 Conflict management: the ability to manage conflicts towards a sufficient level of resolution so as not to obstruct landscape partnerships 3. Capability to make institutions work for the landscape (towards connectedness and alliances beyond the landscape) Key dimensions 1.1 Recognising and capitalising on landscape institutions: the ability to recognise the value of social and cultural capital in the landscape and being able to harness its potential. 1.2 Securing access rights to resources and benefits: the ability to address issues regarding land use, land rights and competing claims on resources and benefits, while also taking into consideration the diversity of landscape actors in terms of gender, ethnic diversity, etc. 1.3 Engaging with external institutions for the benefit of the landscape: the ability to network with relevant institutions beyond the landscape to leverage benefits for the landscape. 1.4 Policy coordination/integration within in the landscape: the ability to align a diversity of (inter)nationally-defined policies so that they support common landscape objectives. 1.5 Mobilizing external support (information, finance, political, etc.): the ability to mobilize external support for achieving agreed landscape objectives. 20

29 4. Capability to create landscape market value (towards responsible landscape enterprise) Key dimensions 1.1 Livelihood benefits from the landscape: the ability to create a basis for achieving livelihood benefits within the landscape. 1.2 Landscape-conscious entrepreneurship: the ability to orientate entrepreneurship towards achieving greater landscape benefits. 1.3 Landscape-oriented business models and finance: the ability to orientate business models and finance to the landscape s unique identity, making use of its multifunctionality ( bundles of products and services ). 1.4 Enabling the economic/market environment: the ability to create an enabling environment for viable economic and market opportunities. 1.5 Landscape-based certification/quality control: the ability to capitalise on the landscape s unique identity for landscape branding in business and trade. 5. Capability to manage landscape resources (towards a resilience-oriented landscape management) Key dimensions 1.1 Landscape resource management processes and structures: the ability to have in place appropriate processes and structures for the integrated management of landscape resources (assets). 1.2 Management decision support base/tools: the ability to appropriately inform landscape resource management decision making from an integrated perspective. 1.3 Integrated spatial planning and decision making: the ability to connect and fine-tune the diversity of spatial planning components from an integrated perspective. 1.4 Participatory monitoring and evaluation of landscape resource management: the ability to define appropriate information needs in relation to evolving landscape resource management, to address those needs through monitoring and evaluation, and to engage landscape actors appropriately. 1.5 Learning and adaptive management: the ability to continue learning about landscape governance and to orient this towards the adaptation of plans and management. 21

30 ICIMOD 2017 International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development GPO Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal Tel Fax Web